Program Development of Digital Leadership for School Administrators Under the office of Primary Educational Service Area
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purposes of the research aim to 1) To study the components and indicators of digital leadership of school administrators 2) To study the current condition desirable conditions and necessities for digital leadership of school administrators 3) Develop a digital leadership development program for school administrators 4) To study the effect of using digital leadership development program of school administrators. Results of the research are as follows: 1) Digital leadership of school administrators consist of 7 components, 22 indicators 2) Desirable Conditions for Digital Leadership of School Administrators. The overall average was at a low level. Desirable Conditions for Digital Leadership of School Administrators Overall, it's at the highest level. and the necessity of developing digital leadership among school administrators, the highest value was digital vision leadership, 3) Program development of digital leadership for school administrators is suitable possible and is useful overall, it was at the highest level. 4) The results of using the program; 4.1) Program development of digital leadership for school administrators. The efficiency was 93.01/95.55, which was higher than the 80/80 threshold set. 4.2) The effectiveness index in the program was 0.9306 or equivalent to 93.06 percent. 4.3) Program development of digital leadership for school administrators has higher academic achievement after school than before with statistical significance at the .05 level. 4.4) Executives developed with the program was no difference in educational achievement scores after 2 weeks of study. 4.5) Satisfaction of school administrators, Overall, the satisfaction level was at the highest level.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it